Q. Explain the structure of the Parliamentary Committee system. How far have the financial committees helped in the institutionalisation of Indian Parliament?

Model Answer: 

Parliamentary Committees function as mini-legislatures, deriving their mandate from Articles 105 and 118, enabling detailed scrutiny outside the partisan floor of Parliament.

Structure of the Parliamentary Committee System

The system is broadly classified into two categories based on tenure and mandate:

1. Standing Committees (Permanent, constituted annually):
   • Financial Committees: Ensure executive financial accountability (PAC, Estimates Committee, CoPU).
   • Departmentally Related Standing Committees (DRSCs): 24 committees scrutinizing ministry grants, policies, and bills.
   • Committees to Inquire: Address specific parliamentary grievances (Privileges, Petitions).
   • Scrutiny Committees: Ensure delegated legislation aligns with parent statutes (Committee on Subordinate Legislation).
   • House-Keeping Committees: Manage day-to-day internal affairs (Rules, Business Advisory).
2. Ad-hoc Committees (Temporary, dissolved after task completion):
   • Inquiry Committees: Investigate specific national issues (JPC on Stock Market Scam).
   • Advisory Committees: Detailed examination of complex legislation (Select/Joint Committees on Bills).

Financial Committees: Institutionalising Indian Parliament

Financial committees have institutionalised legislative oversight, though with certain limitations:

Successes in Institutionalisation:

1. Enforcing Executive Accountability: Ensure funds are strictly spent as authorized (PAC exposed 2G and Coalgate irregularities).
2. Promoting Administrative Efficiency: Estimates Committee suggests alternative policies for economic efficiency and optimal resource utilization.
3. Evaluating PSU Performance: CoPU scrutinizes the commercial viability and operational autonomy of PSUs (Air India audits).
4. Bi-partisan Consensus: Function across party lines without the whip system, fostering objective, non-partisan evaluation.
5. Synergy with Constitutional Bodies: Expert scrutiny is institutionalised via CAG reports (PAC acts as CAG’s “friend, philosopher, and guide”).

Limitations (The “How Far” Aspect):

1. Post-Mortem Scrutiny: Examine expenditures only after they are incurred, limiting proactive or preventive action.
2. Advisory Nature: Recommendations are not binding on ministries; often face delayed or generic Action Taken Reports.
3. Exclusion of Policy Review: Forbidden from questioning the broader government policy underlying the financial grants.

To deepen parliamentary institutionalisation, the NCRWC’s recommendations to empower financial committees with concurrent scrutiny of mega-projects and stricter compliance mechanisms for Action Taken Reports must be adopted.